 |
The Oregon Appellate Review is a blog dedicated to a timely examination of cases from the Oregon Supreme Court, Oregon Court of Appeals, and on occasion, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Kristian Roggendorf is constantly looking at appellate decisions as they are issued to find cases that have an impact on child abuse litigation, Oregon tort law generally, civil rights, election law, and constitutional interpretation. Check back often for the latest word in the world of Oregon appellate law. |
The Gift That Keeps on Giving
By Kristian RoggendorfPublished on Fri, 08/19/2011
Is threatening to disclose someone’s sexually transmitted disease (genital herpes) on social media grounds for a domestic violence restraining order, particularly after they have admitted giving it to the person doing the disclosing? One might think that admitting to a battery (sexual contact while falsely concealing a venereal disease) would stop most people from filing a lawsuit against the person to whom they gave the disease. Not so.
The Unconstitutionality of Forcing Americans to Buy Anything
By Kristian RoggendorfPublished on Mon, 08/15/2011
I have to admit that I haven’t made it through all 304 pages of the Florida v. HHS decision. Going off press reports and legal commentary, the ruling appears to be simple enough: Obamacare’s individual mandate exceeds Congress’ power under the Commerce Clause.
The Wrong Way: No interlocutory appeals on motions to compel production of third party subpoenas
By Kristian RoggendorfPublished on Wed, 08/03/2011
Here’s an appellate procedure question with a potentially significant impact on O’Donnell Clark & Crew’s elder abuse practice: Can a probate proceeding be used to garner discovery when a wrongful death action is on appeal? According to the Court of Appeals in Assisted Living Concepts, Inc. v.
Asking for Additional Identification Is a “Seizure”
By Kristian RoggendorfPublished on Tue, 07/19/2011
We don’t handle any criminal cases at O’Donnell Clark & Crew, but the right to be secure in one’s person and papers is undergoing a redefinition that is at least interesting to note.
The Nuisance is Blowing in the Wind
By Kristian RoggendorfPublished on Mon, 07/18/2011
When does a private nuisance become a public one? In Drayton v City of Lincoln City, the Oregon Court of Appeals was faced with the question of whether the violation of a city ordinance relating to “land disturbing activity causing erosion or deposits of material on the property of another” could constitute a “public nuisance.” The difference had been explained in Mark v. Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, 158 Or App 355, 359-60, 974 P2d 716 (1999):
“Harmless error” doctrine allows conviction to stand in a brutal abuse case
By Kristian RoggendorfPublished on Wed, 07/13/2011
Sometimes, I can’t even get through the facts. Words cannot express the tragedy and evil involved in a case where a 2 year old dies as a result of internal ruptures (including a spine bruised by the impact of the intestines on the spinal column) due to repeated beatings, not to mention the bruises, broken bones, burns and missing hair). In State v.
US Supreme Court: Being a Woman at Wal-Mart Does Not Make You Part of a Class
By Kristian RoggendorfPublished on Mon, 06/20/2011
Rarely does this blog cover US Supreme Court cases, and even more rarely do I tread into employment law. However, the June 20, 2011 ruling from the Court on the Wal-Mart sex-discrimination case is a major decision with a substantial impact on all class actions. In Wal-Mart v. Dukes, Docket No. 10-277, reversed the Ninth Circuit opinion which had allowed the certification of a class consisting of all female Wal-Mart employees employed by the store since December 26, 1998—a group totaling 1.5 million women.
Cutting Corners? The Court of Appeals Takes Judicial Notice of Laser Rangefinder Evidence
By Kristian RoggendorfPublished on Thu, 06/02/2011
This post was going to have the title of “Court of Appeals discovers speed of light,” but that was really only half of the battle in State v. Branch, A140217 (June 1, 2011), see here. It is surprising that despite the common use of laser speed guns (e.g., see here), no Oregon appellate court had yet determined the validity of “lidar” technology (like radar, but with laser light instead of radio waves).
The 9th Cir. Pinnacle Case– APA Review of Judgement Calls, and Pleading Under IQBAL (Part 2)
By Kristian RoggendorfPublished on Wed, 06/01/2011
In the earlier blog on the Pinnacle case, I discussed the facts and the procedural due process claim. In this second installment, we look at APA review and federal pleading in the 9th Circuit.
The 9th Cir. Pinnacle Case Has Something for Everyone – Procedural Due Process by Letter (Part 1)
By Kristian RoggendorfPublished on Tue, 05/31/2011
Dragon skin® seemed like the coolest idea in body armor, ever, when I saw it on Future Weapons back in 2008. The stuff can take multiple direct rifle rounds (not to mention slower pistol rounds), see here, plus a frag grenade (say, if a soldier jumped on it to save his squad), see here. It is an amazing product and hopefully something that will save the lives of soldiers and law enforcement for years to come.